User talk:UtherSRG/Archive 6

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi UtherSRG

I hope you're well. I just wanted to enquire about your close at

) 09:25, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Another user pointed out that it is a misnomer to call one of the Lekas a "crown prince", making that not an ambiguous term. Making one article state "crown" and the other not actually adds precision. However, I'm not opposed to re-opening if you don't feel this is an adequate explanation. As a point of order, you asked why I didn't explain why I rejected your opposition. Should I address each individual opposition when I make closures? Should I do it when the number of arguments is small, like 1-3? Large, like dozens? Should it be only when the opposition wasn't already addressed by someone else in the discussion? (And I note here that your opposition was addressed in the discussion.) Really interested in what people think on this. UtherSRG (talk) 11:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Personally found User talk:Dekimasu#Closing the Shining (video game series) RM (permalink) helpful, but not sure how well it answers your question. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, that does help. If I read it correctly, Dekimasu is saying that it is appropriate to not address every point raised in the closing statement. They also seem to be supporting the same kind of decision I used, that "crown prince" and "prince" are different enough to not warrant any additional discrimination. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:45, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not entirely sure what the above poitn has to do with the issue at hand. This is quite simple, the titles that you've moved to are not "precise", particularly the one that says "Leka, Prince of Albania", given that obviously a crown prince is also a prince. But also, as was pointed out clearly, both of them are frequently referred to as "crown prince" in the sources. The current titles are both in contradiction to

WP:PRECISE, so a reopening or reclosing does need to take place here. The same points were made in the prior RM on the same topic. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk

) 23:12, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:CONSISTENT: We strive to make titles on Wikipedia as consistent as possible with other titles on similar subjects. Again, not a mandate, but a direction to head towards. Presidentman demonstrated this. Given that example made it possible for me to allow the RM to proceed forward with a "move" resolution. Without the alternative policy to work within, I may have ruled "no consensus". At least, if I were closing it now, those would have been my options. Does this answer your question? - UtherSRG (talk)

00:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Temperate continental climate

Hi,

I've noticed that you've recently undone my CSD nomination; giving the reason: See header of talk:Humid continental climate. The header states that the article had been given credit. However, my point was not that the page was vandalism. My problem was, in terms of the Koppen climate classification; a temperate continental climate equals a humid continental climate. These two things, however wrongly, are squeezed into the same categorization, Dxa/Dxb. This, combined with the fact that the text is more or less fully copied over from humid continental climate, is why I had nominated it. If another type of nomination is better, I am ready to concede; however, I think deletion would be within policy, no matter if it is AFD/CSD/PROD. Uness232 (talk) 01:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@Uness232: The problem is this: Text and/or other creative content from Humid continental climate was copied or moved into Temperate continental climate with this edit on July 1, 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. You are asking for it to be deleted, but this says it should not be deleted. Am I reading that wrong? And if both terms are valid and equal, why not just make it a redirect? - UtherSRG (talk) 01:16, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Very sorry, misreading on my part.

I am, however, a fair bit confused on how to nominate something to be a redirect. As far as I understand, RFD is for already existing redirects. Uness232 (talk) 01:20, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Just do it. :) No nomination needed. No wait... I nominate you to do it. Better? :) - UtherSRG (talk) 01:22, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

If you say that's the correct way to do it, sure! Uness232 (talk) 01:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Seems to be. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 10:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I've just noticed when you closed to RM for this article on Sep 29 at

21:18, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Sure thing. My wording was not the best. Supporter

WP:COMMONNAME, since there were a number of instances of both "Earl of Essex" and "Earl of Essex and Forfar" used. - UtherSRG (talk)

22:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Since my name was mentioned here I feel obliged to briefly state that, yes, there was in fact support for the move and the group opposing it were constantly citing

WP:COMMONNAME without considering the subject's preference with regards to his titles. And, the current title is also common and the addition of "and Forfar" does not render a reader's ability to properly identify the subject; the name is still recognizable, which is a requirement based on our naming policy. Keivan.f^Talk

23:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Uther. To Keivan.f, I do not have strong opinions on the topic and so you did not need to defend your opinion, I merely saw Uther's closing statement, after noticing the page had been moved and then looking at the RM out of interest, and noted that the closing statement implied they declared consensus improperly, so I felt it would be best to query and now they have now convinced me they followed the correct procedure in that they carefully evaluated the discussion, and there is consensus for the longer page title. It would also be worth me noting that you, being heavily involved in the discussion, are not in a position to impartially state there is consensus, as you did on this talk page. Only uninvolved editors like Uther should declare a consensus where it is contested. --TedEdwards 22:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Genuinely out of curiosity, by what means did you add

) 16:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: I started my own AfC and grabbed the header from there to put onto that draft. Did that do something wonky that way? - UtherSRG (talk) 17:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Nope, just curious; there was some extra code that wouldn't otherwise have been in there had you done it differently. Primefac (talk) 18:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: Ok cool. What would have been a better way? - UtherSRG (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh, no, I think you misunderstand. I made a change to a template, there were literally four pages that used it, and you managed to copy one of them before I reverted the template change. I was genuinely curious how it ended up there, and it seems like the answer is "really good timing"! Primefac (talk) 12:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh! LOL! Well then, good for me. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 19:36, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, UtherSRG, I continued working on the page Art-abstract - also with several references. I hope this will work. Can it be un-drafted now?FotoDutch (talk) 10:50, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@

subst:submit}} at the top of the draft, and folks who review drafts will come along to review it. - UtherSRG (talk)

10:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!FotoDutch (talk) 11:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, UtherSRG,

I see you are helping out at

so I made an edit to those pages when they showed up on the "Eligible for deletion" list tonight.

If you expect to do more work restoring drafts, I recommend making use of User:SD0001/RFUD-helper script for restoring stale drafts. The script will make those minor page edits so you don't have to remember to! I really rely on scripts and editing tools that ensure that I don't forget simple things in the process of doing admin tasks.

All the best, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

We are slaves to the bots so we use scripts to combat the bots. Got it. :) I'm so used to doing so much by hand. Yay for more scripts to help. Cool. Thanks for letting me know. I'll get on the RFUD helper. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

This happened again with Draft:The Sixty Dome Mosque. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:06, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hrm. And I used the tool to do that.... Hrm... - UtherSRG (talk) 00:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, The initial request at REFUND was improperly formed, so I fixed the request so that the tool could operate. Maybe that wasn't good enough? - UtherSRG (talk) 00:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Liz: Ok, my process is now: check the revision link to see what the g13 state of the article was, hit the star to add it to my watch list, do the refund, refresh my watchlist to see that the minor edit took place. (I normally check my watchlist frequently, so this isn't a big deal.) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, again, UtherSRG,

This page was deleted due to copyright violations and these pages are ordinarily not restored upon request. But you did restore it and moved it to Draft space (

) which doesn't eliminate the copyright violation. I took out the portion of the content that I could see that was taken from another website and then revision deleted all of the edits that I found that contained the illegal content. They had a citation for the copyright violation but just identifying where the content was taken from doesn't mean that it's not a violation.

Please do not restore pages that were deleted due to copyright violations unless you are willing to follow up and make sure that all of the stolen content is removed and that the edits containing it have been deleted. And don't trust the word of new editors saying they will clean it up because if they understood copyright, they never would have had the violations in the first place. It is such a hassle to deal with that most admins refuse to restore any page that was deleted due to copyright violations rather than having to ensure that all of the violations are all removed. It's really best to instruct the editor about rules regarding copyright on Wikipedia and advise them to start from scratch with only original content. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:20, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

This deserves a bit more of a response. I hadn't looked closely enough at the deleted article and I should have. I also should have checked the list of REFUND decline reasons, but I hadn't. That's a god list and usually helps me decide on what to do. My apologies for the extra work you had to do on that. I'll remember this for the future. (The process as well as your generosity.) - UtherSRG (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Ooops my bad that was not my only source 144.129.20.98 (talk) 19:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

To what are you referring? - UtherSRG (talk) 19:28, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey Uther. It's with a heavy heart that I bring forth a notice that I plan to go to Move Review for the Maize/Corn RM.

The opposers at Talk:Maize used, as the base of their "arguments":

1. that the nomination is superficial, is cherrypicking (doesn't support this accusation), and also is by one of my sockpuppets (an accusation that was made, challenged, and then mysteriously dropped)

2. because the nominator doesn't live in the UK

3. Corn is ambiguous

4. Corn is ambiguous

5. Corn is not "entirely unambiguous"

6.

actually does not have a primary topic (scorching hot take)

7. Oppose for no reason

8. Oppose "per the need for finality", with no actual reason given

No one actually gave reasons why the move shouldn't happen, except for a blind assertion that it was ambiguous. No sources were provided for the blind assertions that it was ambiguous.

Your close did not explain why you felt there was no consensus. From where I see it, there were a bunch of people saying JDLI (claiming but not proving ambiguity) and a bunch of people providing sources and arguments as to why that wasn't the case. You also said "I suggest trying a different form of discussion to reach a consensus to move or not move, though I don't have a particular method that might work better" - the problem is that RM is all we have. If there are no good arguments against the move, then the move must be made.

Would love to hear your thoughts. Red Slash 18:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Your list of the opposition statements is, frankly, quite watered down. There were probably a dozen different policies called out in the discussion, with good arguments from both camps. Since the previous RMs were brought up, let me turn this around on you: Do you think the argument for the move has improved over the previous RMs? As for my suggestion, one option is to have many slower conversations among parties of both camps, try to see each others' sides. Have more communication and less argument. Craft some proposals. When some tentative agreement seems to be forming, double check on this with the other side. Then, once you have some good wording, create a new RM to build a larger consensus. To continue doing the same RM over and over and expecting something to go differently... well, I think you know what that is the definition of, eh? Anyway, that's one way I see of y'all trying something new. There are always different ways to work on things. Just because "RM is all we have" doesn't mean it is the best place to start; it's just the final and formal portion that must be used. Working together with folks with opposing views is where the goodness happens. Jumping right to pushing for a solution and then having both sides being confrontational is where the badness happens. Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

As for why I didn't include more in my closing statement - that was wrong of me and I apologize. I should have indeed said more. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll gladly answer your questions. No, I don't think the situation has changed much since the last request, and my opinion on that last request hasn't changed since I proposed the move all those years ago. The common name is corn, especially in American English, which is the ENGVAR that the article is ostensibly written in.

I'm not sure what you mean by "craft some proposals". The article either has to be at "maize" or at "corn". The opposers are opposing because they claim that "corn" is ambiguous (which sources prove that it's not), or for reasons completely unrelated to the merits ("per the need for finality"). There's not much that can be done to convince the former that wasn't already done. I'm not sure all the opposers were even opposing in good faith; one of them quite literally accused me of having a sockpuppet before I had even chimed in to the move request. Even assuming the best, multiple editors tried reasoning and coming to a consensus; one side brought sources, and one side accused "cherrypicking" without bringing any backing to that accusation.

Unfortunately, at Wikipedia, sometimes you have to do the same thing over and over and over again before certain move requests can get through. You've been around long enough to remember

corn

, it would literally never move again, because there would be no reasonable argument in its favor.)

Anyway, the talk page at Talk:Maize is full of people doing pretty much exactly what you suggest. An embarrassing proportion of the talk page archives is devoted to the page's name... because that name is nonsensical and out of alignment with our policies. I don't think there are any possible paths forward that are less confrontational than a move request. I'm upset at even the idea of going to move review, because I respect you quite a bit. If you expound a bit on your decision on Talk:Maize, at least we'll have something to debate there, so if you wouldn't mind doing so, I'd appreciate that at least. Red Slash 04:22, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, since there isn't an active discussion there, I'm loathe to start one up. And no, I don't remember those RMs. I stepped away from actively adminning for quite a long time, and I don't think I did much work in the RM field even when I was previously active. What we have at Maize is a deadlocked impasse. I don't expect things will change unless something else changes. Either change the way the discussion is had, change the arguments being used in the discussion, or change the policies or other guidelines those arguments are based on. Since consensus hasn't changed on this in 15 years, I suggest working a different angle. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Red Slash: I ran across talk:pig today. 11 years before doing an RM, they did a quick poll. You could take a look at that and and try to build a move consensus in that manner, so something similar. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

DEFECTOR 1985 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) It's a sock of LTA Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Evlekis, so would you please remove TPA and email access ASAP? See note on his SPI-page. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 11:58, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Done! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:59, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Exactly what I was coming to ask for. Glad I know the LTA they link to for the next time I see them. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I agree with your use of revdel at User talk:AndyTheGrump - all they did was remove an existing thread and then issue a warning - neither of which justifies use of revdel. Similarly at Liberland you cited Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#3 but there's nothing which meets that criteria as far as I can see. Can you please review the revdel policy and reconsider? SmartSE (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Smartse: No problem. I was going a bit fast to clean and was probably overzealous. Given some of the fake users they created, I wanted to be safe. So.... looking at RD3.... it includes harassment. Is removing and re-adding sections of text (as done on AndyTheGrump's talk page considered harassment? I think it is. Likewise with the Liberland article. Why give them the pleasure of being able to pull up the history to show their buddies what they did? shrugs. I can unrevdel if desired, but I do think this falls within the definition of harassment. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:22, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining - I'm very sure that the community does not consider that a sufficient level of harassment to merit revdel. As for deleting at Liberland - that is definitely against the norm and if we deleted all revisions by vandals, we would be very very busy. I'm not overly bothered about these specific ones, just wanted to give you a heads-up as I noticed that you returned recently after a long absence. P.S. pings only work when you sign a comment in the same edit. SmartSE (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Smartse: Ok. I'll unrevdel. And I did not know that about pings! - UtherSRG (talk) 16:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Titi monkey/Muttonbird Islands shouldn't exist. Please delete it. Given that sloppy move, and the speed with which you moved the species articles, I assume "Every source discussing them calls them a "titi monkey", not just "titi"." is referring to sources for the subfamily, and you didn't actually check the sources for each species. You should probably edit each of the species articles to add "monkey" to the lead; but be careful, the name without "monkey" may be sourced to MSW, and MSW names don't include "monkey"; you'll need to find a new source for the version with "monkey" (Ashy black titi monkey is one article with a name sourced to MSW). Plantdrew (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

How did the Muttonbird Islands subpage get mixed into all of this? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Plantdrew: Ah... the islands have a / in the name, so a redirect from the subpage. Is there a better way to handle that? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

There isn't a better way to handle that. It is called for by Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(New_Zealand)#Dual_and_alternative_place_names. Plantdrew (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Interesting that we chose that method instead of using a hyphen, which would avoid the subpage issue. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, can you review Draft:Aries Vismayas Max? 2409:4073:218C:A853:700B:DC5D:F209:9473 (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I can't. I'm not a reviewer. Looks like there are close to 3000 drafts awaiting review. You'll just have to be patient and work on something else in the meantime. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:54, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1119661340

Hi! Thanks for reverting my edit, I didn’t realize it was in the wrong section… I wouldn’t have noticed if I didn’t check back and you had removed it… Thanks for keeping things clean around Wikipedia! BhamBoi (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries! - UtherSRG (talk) 22:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of mammal genera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bovina.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, friendly little bot! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding with the Wing Loong II drone, the name should be redirected to Chengdu GJ-2.

Wing Loong is name for export given by the manufacturer Chengdu while GJ-2 is a formal designation by Chinese People's Liberation Army. Using Chinese military designation is naming convention on Wikipedia for every Chinese military aircraft articles. For example Chengdu J-10, J-10 is the formal designation while FC-10 is the export name. Same as Xi'an JH-7 and its export name FBC-1, Chengdu J-7 and its export name F-7. Infinty 0 (talk) 22:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

@

WP:RM/TR to move it back to where it was before any moves had happened. I have no other interest in the article. - UtherSRG (talk)

22:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Whoops

Hadn't realize we were in an archive, sorry! Valereee (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Why was my addition for the common name of the asiatic lion removed (asian lion)? Wouldn't it be a reasonable common name since it is simply an alternate name, regardless of the animal? Firekong1 (talk) 15:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

It's unsourced. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I see. But do common names require sources to be put in articles?

I ask from a place of misunderstanding, as I have been told that most articles using common names for animals have not followed this rule properly. Firekong1 (talk) 17:12, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

If you are adding something new, then yes. "Asian" vs "Asiatic"... Asiatic is correct, while "Asian" is a misconception. IF you have a source that uses it, please provide the source. Otherwise, it's just something someone made up and isn't actually used. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I see, thanks. I apologize if I seemed to be a vandal, I did not mean to come across as engaging in vandalism. I simply thought that adding a similar common name wouldn't have needed to be sourced, since such names for animals appear organically. I do hope you understand.

Firekong1 (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

It's all part of the Wiki-learning process. :) UtherSRG (talk) 19:07, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. :)

I do hope that in the future, wikipedia will solidify its stance on adding common names of animals, since it is pretty confusing for now.

Firekong1 (talk) 20:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

When in doubt, always provide a citation. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Of course, whenever needed, especially when current information of common animal names is updated. Firekong1 (talk) 23:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

The biggest exception is that the lede shouldn't have many, if any, citations... it should be summarizing facts listed in the main body. But often, especially for species, things like common names are only in the lede, so they need citations. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:16, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Not always, but I understand, that’s what I meant. Thanks for clarifying. Firekong1 (talk) 14:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Yw - UtherSRG (talk) 17:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @

12:56, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh, well then G6 housekeeping. We don't need cross-namespace redirects in either direction. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

@

(talk)

04:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes. What purpose do they server? Moves between namespaces should be done without leaving a redirect behind. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:15, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

That requires pagemover permissions many AFC reviewers do not have that permission and the AFC script currently does not give the option to not leave behind a redirect or automatically tag the old draft. The standard practice is that the redirect stays behind once accepted. This isn't a policy or guideline it's just what has been happening for years in the AFC space Wikipedia:Database reports/Page count by namespace draft space has 3 times as many redirects as actual drafts. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 06:06, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

So its a matter of practice because of access/tooling. Neither of those stop the AfC reviewer from tagging the resulting redir as G6 housekeeping. I'll ask again, what purpose do these redirects serve? - UtherSRG (talk) 19:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

There was an explicit consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 135#Draft Namespace Redirects not to delete these redirects. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! That was helpful. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

FYI, an editor has recreated the article, despite your recent deletion of it to make way for

) 13:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Done! UtherSRG (talk) 13:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello! You recently deleted an article of mine, would it be possible for me to access the article to use it as a reference? Dead history (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Someone else deleted the article. I merely provided info on how to prevent that from happening in the future. Start the AfC process and let me know the name of the draft and I can put your edit in there. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

UtherSRG, the {{Db-g6}} request at the redirect Pure Colour was so that I could move the article User:WildStar/draft/Pure Colour. Thank you! — WILDSTAR^TALK 01:47, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

@WildStar: Ah! Putting that in the CSD would have been helpful. I'll del it now. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:47, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, I just went ahead and did the move. :) Cheers! UtherSRG (talk) 01:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

UtherSRG, the rationale was included in the G6. No worries, it's all good! Thanks again! — WILDSTAR^TALK 02:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Enjoy! :D - UtherSRG (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Can you explain how your use of rollback on several of my edits (specifically [1] [2] and [3]) meets

19:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I can't that was wrong. Sorry. Your edits were good faith, though not needed. Even though they were done by a sock, they were reasonable and correct. Since it was multiple articles that appeared in my watchlist back to back, I took the cheap and easy way out. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:09, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

This is an LTA and the edits were reverted per

WP:BANREVERT. I have no issue with editors reinstating such reverts if the edits are useful, and generally thank people for doing so, but I was confused with your reverts because they were unxplained and appeared contradictory when I checked them; this edit you restored added a link to ape, within a direct quote and this revert removed a link to ape. Regardless, I'm always trying to learn when my edits are reverted and these reverts left my scratching me head (not unlike, say, this guy - ha!).-- Ponyo^{bons mots}

20:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Re-delete pages

Hi, can you please re-delete Template:Db-banned-notice, Template:Db-banned-notice/doc, and Template:Db-banned-deleted under G5, as these undeletion requests were invalid due to being created by a sockpuppet (User:CandyFanBot). Thanks. Uhai (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Done. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Also do the same with Draft:TurBus for the same reason. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:24, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

And done! - UtherSRG (talk) 21:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi UtherSRG, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 21:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, my IP block exempt flag expired, and I can't edit when I'm on long distance trains, because all those IPs are blocked. Could I please have the flag back? Thank you! Dr. Vogel (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to do that. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea what your interface looks like, but I imagine it'd be a permission like all the others. Sorry. Dr. Vogel (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

@DrVogel I think that takes higher perms than admin. You should ask whomever granted you the perms before. UtherSRG (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't realise, sorry. @Risker kindly sorted this out before, but I don't think he's around these days. Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

• Hi there. I *am* still around, although I've been dealing with off-wiki matters this past few days. In any case,
  WP:IPBE, where the email address is located. It sends an email to a VRT queue that all CUs can access, so there's less delay for determining next steps. Risker (talk
  ) 22:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you for sorting! I've seen that page, but I find the wording on it a bit intimidating to be honest! (also, last time you said to give you a shout if this needed renewing ;)) Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I have nominated

) 08:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Can you review Mohamed Elhusseini Draft please !

Can you review Mohamed Elhusseini Draft please ! I follow all composers guidelines i think now you can accept article ? Ahmedemad665 (talk) 16:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@

canvass for attention. Just be patient. - UtherSRG (talk)

16:49, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks Ahmedemad665 (talk) 17:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Do you have the source for File:Distribución symphalangus.png and File:Distribución nomascus.png? They're not cited in the Help:File description page on Commons. Thanks for your help. A455bcd9 (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

For siamang, use the IUCN ref on the article's page. For the Nomascus genus, there is an IUCN on each of the species and subspecies articles. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. For siamang, the maps are indeed almost identical: I removed the tag and added the ref on Commons. For File:Distribución nomascus.png, the maps look different, even if you superpose them, especially Concolor (the southern area isn't displayed), Nasutus (way too large on "our" map), Hainanus (likewise, should only be a small dote in Hainan), Leucogenys (seems way too large as well), and Annamensis (missing? incorrectly tagged because the author didn't know its name?). A455bcd9 (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@A455bcd9: It occurs to me that the maps may simply be out of date. Please check the creation date of those maps and see if there is an older IUCN entry that matches better. Then we can additionally tag them with some for of {{as of}} to show they need updating. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: the file was uploaded in June 2010. Concolor was assessed in 2015 and in 2008. Same for Hainanus (2015 and 2008). In both cases, the IUCN's maps are different from our map.

I therefore suggest that we remove this poor-quality, non colorblind-friendly, inaccurate, unsourced, original research map. What do you think? A455bcd9 (talk) 11:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Agree. However, also tag the map's maker/updater to see if they can make us another, and also poke on one or two other map makers to find a replacement. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:59, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

This map maker is unfortunately well-known for their original research maps about languages and dialects and never answers when asked to fix them or provide sources... A455bcd9 (talk) 12:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I've just removed the image. I don't know enough about the field, if you want a new map, please post a request here. Please note that IUCN's maps can be freely re-used per Commons:Template:IUCN map permission so you can also just download them and upload them directly on Commons. A455bcd9 (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Example: Concolor JPG. Although it may use Google Maps for the background and I'm afraid we cannot re-use that... A455bcd9 (talk) 12:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested! Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 12:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Is there a template for this message? Wondering since I think I'd use it. Steel1943 (talk) 22:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

@Steel1943: It's from a tool: User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js - UtherSRG (talk) 22:55, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Deepfriedokra

Yeah, no. It was a block evading, now rangeblocked IP. I will remove the protection so legitimate users can have unfettered access. It was not a content dispute-- pure vandalism. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Roger that. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I've moved this back to draft space - there are numerous problems with the article - poor sourcing, failing verification and promotionalism and also several indicators that the editor is an undisclosed paid editor. I don't want to explain the last one in public per

) 17:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Was trying to get my toes wet in the reviewer arena. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:09, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Hey I saw you moved

) 16:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Can do! UtherSRG (talk) 16:28, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

...and done! Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 16:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately there are not many references to this ferry link, but I think it's fairly notable as it is remained the only functioning passenger ferry line between China and Japan. Thanks! Sgnpkd (talk) 19:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can find another notability criteria that the article can meet, we can discuss that. As things stand, there is no proof of notability in the article that meets the criteria needed for inclusion in the encyclopedia. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I notice that you have been removing initials of Johann Friedrich Gmelin in speciesboxes with the comment "No initials for this authority is standard. see List_of_authors_of_names_published_under_the_ICZN#G. The linked Wiki article on names is not authoritative. Editors on English Wikipedia have chosen to follow the IOC taxonomy – and the IOC adds initials to Johann Friedrich Gmelin's name. My understanding is that initials are added when there may be ambiguity. In this case it is to distinguish Johann Friedrich Gmelin from Samuel Gottlieb Gmelin – who is the authority for several bird species such as the black redstart and the pine bunting. I notice that Samuel Gottlieb Gmelin is not included in the Wiki list – in fact a complete list of names would be enormous.

(Now I have to admit that there are other names to which the IOC add initials where I don't understand why. For example the IOC add initials to Ernst Hartert as "Hartert, EJO" – but I'm not aware of another Hartert – and nor is Zoobank see here.) - Aa77zz (talk) 22:31, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

IOC tends to act in a bird-only arena. Since we deal with a larger arena of species, it makes sense in some regards to view things from a broader perspective. Gmelin (and not the abbreviation used in his bio box) is standard from the ICZN's similarly broader perspective, while SG's is not-existent. Further, having bother "Gmelin" and "Gmelin, JF" looks like those would then be two different people. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Good Job Dear Farhan RR Official (talk) 11:17, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, UtherSRG,

Regarding User talk:M.Ashraf333, admins typically don't user revision deletion just because an editor is uncomfortable with a user talk page discussion. The criteria of what content warrants revision deletion is limited and listed right here. The only real reason I can see to use revision deletion on this page is because some personal information was disclosed by the other editor. But we don't use revision deletion casually, it's typically used for copyright violations and offensive content like racism and personal attacks more than just unwanted discussions.

I hope you take this message in the helpful spirit that was intended. Thanks again for helping out on my user talk page so frequently when I'm otherwise disengaged. I appreciate it Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:03, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I was led to see this user talk page because I was looking at some articles that the editor had PROD'd and decided to look into their other edits. I was surprised to see an empty talk page so I looked at the page history and saw all of revision deletion. Hope that explains how I wandered into this. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

No worries on the tone. Yeah, I knew I was skirting the edge there. I do note that the policy has an in general statement, which means there is some flexibility. Given that this was an attempted barnstar bribe, I wasn't concerned that I was hiding something serious, other than the PI. Also, I note that the user who posted on that talk page posted the barnstar here after I asked them to speak English on the EN wiki. I haven't yet decided whether to accept it. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Katsusuke Meguro and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 5#Katsusuke Meguro until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 21:34, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I've replied. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

We've got a few of the regulars off of the

) 17:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw this from there. I prefer drafts go through the AFC review process.... otherwise you're asking page movers to do the review, or to skip the review. I assume something is in draft-space for a reason, and reviews are the way out of there. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:26, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

When I found out that this was created, I looked and would have reviewed it myself (I'm on the WP:AFC team) and moved it to mainspace, *except* that the redirect that kept it from moving was already there which I can't move it over. Given that, I started doing research on the page and adding things. The primary creator is User:Rublamb, not myself.Naraht (talk) 17:31, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah ok. I'll move it. Next time, let RM/TR know you are on the review team. That helps. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:05, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! We'll continue on. :)

@UtherSRG, I moved it from my sandbox to draft so others in the WP:FRAT could discuss. I would have direct published except for the pesky problem of the redirect page that I didn't admin status to delete. There is no problem/reason for it to be in draft. Thanks Rublamb (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for tagging me for deletion of Bharati Vidyapeeth College of Engineering article and giving me a heads up. Meanwhile as I was browsing your page to thank you I noticed you have mentioned your date of birth on project. I work in anti-fraud domain these days and I can tell you your date of birth is a very valuable information for a fraudster. It can be used by them to commit identity theft and Account Takeover on your bank accounts. Many banks use date of birth as a way of verifying customers- so it is critical to not let it be exposed too much. Please consider removing it.

Thanks, Hitesh Hunnyhiteshseth (talk) 18:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

This article was named after some random person's house address. Maybe that should be removed from public view. Although, that being said, there was no personal information associated with the address aside from a nonsensical story about someone teleporting through the neighborhood or whatever. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, but where? I think it's fine as is now. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I need to have my user page reinstated. I have several awards, wikiprojects, etc that need to be re-instated. Also, for at least a couple days, the biography, until I find some other website where I can put that. Thanks, and God bless!

) 13:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Your biography is the reason I deleted your user page. Please read the info I left on your talk page. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok, so since you haven't done as I requested, and as its usually done after such a request, I will take the matter into arbitration. What I requested of you is not such an unusual request. Thanks, and God bless!

que me dices?

) 23:47, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Proper channel would be

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

00:12, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This is really poor judgment in my opinion, the user has an active editing history and other valid content on his user page. I would urge you to remedy your mistake by undeleting the user page. Stifle (talk) 10:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Did you read their userpage? It was highly problematic. I've now restored the non-problematic portion, though without the history. With 650+ edits, that's a high burden to have to slog through. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for

User:AntonioMartin

An editor has asked for

talk

) 10:12, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Acknowledged. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Lil Snupe

I noticed you recently moved Lil Snupe from draft to mainspace. Was it significantly improved over the article that existed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lil Snupe and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lil Snupe (2nd nomination)? He died in 2013, and the comments in the previous AFDs were pretty convincing. Does it meet G4 for a speedy delete? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The current editor gave fairly persuasive arguments in favor at RM/TM. Hrm, since I used the AfC tools, I don't think the move comment got the permlink to that discussion, but you should be able to find it in the history of the request page. If not, I can dig it up for you. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Less than one year to go to be a 20-year Wikipedian. You should write a freakin' book, UtherSRG! Best of everything to you and yours!

ed. ^put'r there

 07:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate the thoughts! :) UtherSRG (talk) 11:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Animals

Come on, I've watched several wildlife documentaries and I saw the way spotted hyenas hunt and scavenge impala so frequently that only wildebeests were preyed more. So it's a fact that spotted hyenas hunt impalas much more frequently than you think. So come in terms with me and agree with this fact.

talk

) 09:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

The facts are not in dispute. You must provide citations to support the facts, otherwise the facts are not usable in the article. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

(

20 upper

, that's not true. Female lions herd prey toward a rise, and guess who's on the other side of the rise... yup, the males. Learned this while living awhile in Ethiopia back in '73–'75. Blackmaned lions were local as well as several species of hyena.

I'm 73yo so please allow me to ramble a little. I lived in a small village called Harar in eastern Ethiopia near Somalia. Harar boasted something found nowhere else in the world. The villagers called him the "Hyena Man". Every evening, whether or not there were watchers, the Hyena Man would carry a large basket of raw meat and bones out the North gate of the walled "Old Town" and then called the hyena. He did this every night because he did not want the local hyena to wander too far from Harar. They would come and he would spend an hour or so tossing out meat to them.

It gets even more interesting when there are the occasional tourists because he puts on a show for them. Spends some time throwing the meat out to the hyena. Then he has them come in close to him to grab the meat from his hand. And I do mean "grab", because they don't just run in like a puppy and gently take the meat. One hyena approaches the HM slowly and cautiously until they're about six feet apart, when the hyena stops and stares the HM in the eyes for awhile. One wrong move and the hyena is off like a shot without the meat. The HM crouches and holds out the meat. Then, almost in the wink of an eye, the hyena rises, her head moves quickly in a downward and to-the-side movement as she whips the meat from the HM's hand, then runs off. Happens so fast, if you blink you might miss it.

After a few of those, the HM draws a long slender meatbone from his basket, crouches on all fours, calls a hyena and puts one end of the meatbone in his mouth. By then night has fallen and a few small fires have been lit so the tourists can still see. (fyi, hyena and other animals are not afraid of small fires, they are much more afraid of men with guns) As long as the HM stays perfectly still, I'm sure you can imagine what happens next. Yes, a hyena stealthily approaches, stops, and then whips that meatbone right out of the HM's mouth! One of the best shows I've ever seen. Other villagers told us that previous Hyena Men had been killed by the hyena, so as these are of course wild animals the act is not without its danger. There's more, but I've rambled enough. Good luck with those sources, and Best to you!

ed. ^put'r there

 13:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft cats

I'm fully aware of that template, but it's not always appropriate or useful in all cases -- for instance, sometimes people try to file drafts in categories that wouldn't be correct even if the page were in mainspace (e.g. filing a musician directly in Category:Music instead of Category:American musicians), or redlinked categories that don't even exist at all, and there's no value in leaving bad categories on a page only to make more cleanup work for myself or other people later. Also, people don't always place categories at the end of the page, and instead sometimes bury them somewhere in the middle or leave categories scattered in multiple different places throughout the page instead of putting them all together in one place -- so sometimes looking for the categories in order to wrap them (and/or actually cut and paste them around the page if needed) entails more of a time investment than I have a responsibility to actually put in, and the only option left is to just HotCat them out.
So it's all very conditional; sometimes wrapping the categories is legitimate, but sometimes it's either a bad idea or a waste of my time. If I find one categorized draft that I'm dealing with in isolation, then certainly I'll put in the extra time to investigate "are these all correct and appropriate categories in the first place, and are they all already grouped together in the appropriate place so I can just slap the wrapper template around them and be done" -- but if I'm dealing with a batch of 15 or 20 of them at once (like when I do a regular incategory scan for user and draft pages sitting in Category:Living people, where there are virtually always a dozen or more a pop), then it has to be "what's the absolute quickest solution that gets me out of here in no more than ten seconds per page without having to detour into any extended investigations?", and the answer to that is usually to just click them out in HotCat. Bearcat (talk) 15:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft

Thank you for undeleting this page. Can you tell me what needs to be done so it gets published for all to see ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeanTwnJ (talk • contribs)

@

my first article. You have a lot of editing work to do on the draft, which says to me that you don't understand Wikipedia well enough to do this work at this time, and need the tutorial. Let the draft sit for now. It'll be there for six months before it gets deleted again. LEarn the ropes of how to actually be an editor here first. Creating a brand new article is one of the most difficult things to do here. - UtherSRG (talk)

20:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

some random IP

Your last edits: what do you mean by this "rm cats that are parents of other cats used here"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.76.211.149 (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Articles shouldn't go in more than one category in a category tree. "Restaurants of Ramallah" is included in "Restaurants of Palestine", which is included in "Restaurants by country", etc. So I removed all of the categories that contained at least one other category used in the article. that was most of them. Also, please create new sections when starting a new discussion on a talk page, and sign your talk edits with ~~~~ - UtherSRG (talk) 15:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

ok, thanks 37.76.211.149 (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

can you please take a look at the article and let me know if you have any comments? thanks 37.76.211.149 (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll turn this around on you: Read

WP:NORG. Identify the assertion of notability in your draft that aligns to one of the notability criteria in NORG. State here the criteria, and the assertion of that notability in the draft. UtherSRG (talk)

16:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Velca Design

I hope not to bother @UtherSRG, me and other users had to create (for an Educational Project) this draft page: Draft: Velca Design, we have submitted it on 9th of December and we wanted to kindly ask you if you could have a look and tell us how to improve it in order to fix all the mistakes. Thank you for your time.Fraliuc2 (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I already gave my advise elsewhere. However, please peruse

what is needed to support the assertion. - UtherSRG (talk)

15:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Aearthrise

You might want to look at these two edits by this editor, here, and here. I'd revert them, but I am not sure what they are attempting to do, and do not want to get involved with someone so argumentative. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Never mind, I see that Rosguill has already handled it.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:21, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Thanks for the pointer anyway. I, too, do not wish to engage with them any more than I have to. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Golden lion tamarin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tegula.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you friendly little bot, but the only option on the dab page that fits is a red link, so I won't be changing my edit. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Danny De Vito

Please do not revert an information which is referenced and fortunately its contemporary. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 01:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@RoyalHeritageAlb: Please only use approved sources to cite new data. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Rock Extreme/Rock Action (TV channel)

Hi, I saw that you removed my request at WP:RM/TR. The topic of the article is just a rebrand and the title Rock Extreme can be moved to a new title Rock Action rather than creating a new article for itself. Can you move the title itself and merge the history? SeanJ 2007 (talk) 01:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I remved the request because it is already at the destination you say you want it at. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

What I mean is Rock Extreme can be just move to its new title Rock Action and the information on the page itself will be changed, the only problem here is the history page, why can it just be merged to Rock Extreme since it is just a rebrand? The page itself can be moved to a new title but a user created it on a separate article. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 02:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

oh, I see. You want a history merge. That's not technically a move, though a move action is performed by doing it. UtherSRG (talk) 02:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I tried moving it, but it cannot, it said I need to request to

WP:RM SeanJ 2007 (talk

) 03:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Never mind, you fixed the history page. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 03:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, UtherSRG
	Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you and yours nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 20:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Not my holiday, but thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Title of Howl at the Moon

A previous

WP:RM discussion on the talk page ended without consensus to move the article (then at Howl at the Moon Piano Bar) to Howl at the Moon. I think a new discussion would be needed to determine that the piano bar is the primary topic of the term. BD2412 T

22:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Cool. Move it to the dab'd title, and have the RM/TR requestor to open an RM (or go back in history and hit the discuss option). UtherSRG (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

• Reply - Should a move from Howl at the Moon to Howl at the Moon (disambiguation) not be explicitly listed at this discussion as well? --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  I'd say that would be an uncontroversial move and doesn't need to be discussed in the RM. UtherSRG (talk) 01:06, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  • Reply - Actually, I don't think that a move request can be made with a destination that has significant content, unless the destination with significant content is nominated for a move request. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

    You are correct. Ok. I've updated it for you. UtherSRG (talk) 01:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Su Li-yang

Hi, I see you rejected this draft on the basis of WP:NBAD. Can you specifically tell me which point of it? And, for WP:GNG ref no. 1, 2 and 4 provide his biographical and additional details. Please clarify. Thanks. zoglophie 12:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Did you read

WP:NBAD? Which of the three criteria in there does the draft meet? I do not see the draft showing that the subject has passed any of the criteria. UtherSRG (talk)

12:25, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Mohamed Elhusseini

Sorry about not returning the headers after I draftified. I usually do that, but I got a bit distracted by a lost cat (yes, I did say a lost cat, believe it or not), and forgot to get back to it when I returned to the computer. Thanks for taking care of it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

No problem. I'll post the COI and UPE info to the editor as well, since I don't think they read the edit summaries. UtherSRG (talk) 13:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I dont understand why page moved to draft can you help me to fix it ?!

I dont understand why Mohamed Elhusseini page moved to draft can you help me to fix it ?! Ahmedemad665 (talk) 13:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Please don't fracture conversations by starting a new one (like this) when there is an existing one (at the draft). UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Im sorry but i dont understand what happened Ahmedemad665 (talk) 14:20, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Please stop replying here. Just because I didn't respond there, doesn't mean you should continue to fracture. If you don't understand what I said there, I can not help you. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I cant understand why article rejected can any one help me what step i should take to fix the problem ؟ Ahmedemad665 (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Go ask at The Teahouse. I'm done with this. UtherSRG (talk) 18:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Sam Wasson

Would you mind reconsidering your speedy deletion of Sam Wasson? I previously declined a prod on the article and disagree that it was unambiguous advertising with no encylopedic content. Thanks! Jfire (talk) 01:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jfire: Yeah, though I don't think it's fit for staying in the encyclopedia as is without something else. I think in this case draftifying so that the kinks can be worked out before letting it go live again. Cool? - UtherSRG (talk) 01:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks. Jfire (talk) 02:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Abbey Curling Club

I came across the very old list of Curling Clubs in Saskatchewan and updated it. And then I noticed that none of the links to the clubs are working. Probably the Abbey Curling Club is a very bad place to start - it was the first one on the original list. I will try to find a link to the municipality or a news article to show that it exists. many of these clubs are tiny without a website or fb page. Thanks for your patience Curlingrinks Curlingrinks (talk) 05:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@

COI notice on the draft. Please read and understand our policies and do what's needed to stay within them. - UtherSRG (talk)

12:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Panopea bitruncata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you helpful little bot! UtherSRG (talk) 12:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, UtherSRG!

Happy New Year!

UtherSRG,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 21:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 21:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, UtherSRG!

Happy New Year!

UtherSRG,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 12:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 12:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Sam Wasson

Hello, UtherSRG,

Just a reminder that an editor has a right to object to draftification of a main space article and revert a move to Draft space from main space. Please do not move an article to Draft space more than once. I know that, one time, I forgot I had moved an article to Draft space and moved it a second time by mistake. But we don't want to see move wars between editors.

I hope you have a pleasant New Years! Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. UtherSRG (talk) 13:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

"Bible and Tanach" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect

Bible and Tanach and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 1 § Bible and Tanach until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk

) 09:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! UtherSRG (talk) 14:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Ishfaq something

Hi, I saw that you (not unreasonably!) rejected my speedy request on Ishfaq Kulgami, saying it's not the same article as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishfaq Manzoor. However, the sources are the same, and I suspect it actually is about the same person. Anyway, I'll obviously bow to your better understanding. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay, never mind — just seen that you deleted it after all. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Yup. :) UtherSRG (talk) 18:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, UtherSRG!

Happy New Year!

UtherSRG,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 05:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 05:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Renaming

Yatie

Hello. I am not sure if this is the right place to address this, but you have missed renaming

Yatie to Yaṯiʿe while implementing my technical move request. Could you please fix this? Thanks in advance. Antiquistik (talk

) 19:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, it looks like the requester just after you had accidentally removed that request. I've got it done now. UtherSRG (talk) 19:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery

Many thanks! Springnuts (talk) 08:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Yup. UtherSRG (talk) 11:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Undeletions

I would like to thank you for your time and effort at

WP:RFU in the last three months for lowering the waiting time for undeletions. I hope that 2023 is your year. Coincidentally, I too started on RFU on an 8th of October (2021), and was active the whole of 2022, until October of course, when I realized I could not find any more backlogs! Jay 💬

14:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate it! :) UtherSRG (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello again.

Hi SRG, a week ago I sought your response on declination of

Draft:Su Li-yang. I believe it does pass WP:NBAD #1 which states "Medalist at the highest international teams or singles/doubles championships of a country (e.g., Canadian Open, German Open, Slovak International)". In which medalists at the highest Championship of the country as his runner up performance in Mongolia International. Mongolia International is the highest level badminton tournament in Mongolia. I have also properly referenced the whole article, which you can go through once again. Thankyou. zoglophie

13:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Does "runner-up" equate to "medalist"? UtherSRG (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ofcourse, medal ceremony includes first and second position. zoglophie 14:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Then why is it "runner-up" instead of "silver" or "bronze"? UtherSRG (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Silver and Bronze in general is reserved for referring to continental or world championships, which is the norm in badminton articles. For instance see Akane Yamaguchi. Third place is never awarded in ceremony in the World tour and International Badminton Series. zoglophie 14:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok.

WP:NBAD may need some updating to make that more clear, but I'm good with it now. Would you go to WT:NBAD and request an expansion/clarification? UtherSRG (talk)

14:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

It is normally understood, because if you see the "medalists" in the context of World Tour + International challenge and series, both the positions (1st and 2nd) are awarded in the medal ceremony and ofcourse felicitated with medals. In case of World Championship, there are awards for third position or bronze medalists as well in addition with gold and silver medalists. Thankyou. zoglophie 14:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Happy New Year! UtherSRG (talk) 14:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Accepting page you declined

Hey! I noticed that with Su Li-yang you had previously declined then draft and then proceeded to resubmit it and accept it when nothing had changed with the draft. May I ask why you did this? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Read the discussion directly above. :) UtherSRG (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah alright. Just was a bit confused as I don't usually see things like that. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:26, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Cheer & Happy New Year! UtherSRG (talk) 14:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Page you declined that had more than its fair share of reliable first hand sources

That Justin Clancy Page that I submitted had at least 10 first hand sources that wrote entire articles dedicated to the subject, I highly doubt you even opened any refs to read them if you declined it. What really has me perplexed is if you look up half of the artists out there submitted by MusicBrainz (like infamous mobb, REKS, Token, pretty much 9 out of 10 underground artists), they have one or two if not maybe 3 or 4 secondary refs with 0 first hand refs and those pages have been up for years. A lot of the times, worse comes to worse, some of those pages have a disclaimer at the top of the article warning anybody who is going to read it (See M-Dot, rapper from Massachusetts). I was just wondering if you could go back through and actually read the references? Can I at least get an explanation or feedback from you about how entire 5-10 paragraph articles specifically about Justin Clancy in reputable sources such as the Boston Globe, Huffington Post, NBC, The Source hiphop magazine, Boston Music Awards, The Lynn Item & More doesn't make the cut when dozens upon dozens of other articles about similar artists get approved with an undeniably weaker base of references? Not even angry I'd just like to know how close this article is, because as an avid Wikipedia reader I'd trust this article's sources and then some. (Belltreelover (talk) 23:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC))

As I said in my comment on the draft: Please read

WP:WHATABOUT. UtherSRG (talk)

01:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for moving back the Indus script article. Chaipau (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome! UtherSRG (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Speciesbox template

Hello. Can I ask You how to fill properly Speciesbox template? I tried to do it, but it behaves different way than in polish language Wikipedia where I have to fill all systematic taxa from kingdom to described taxon. Here, in en.wiki, I can see any higher ran taxa in it. Thank You, Mpn (talk) 18:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mpn The species box and the automatic taxobox require supported templates. check out my contribution history to see..... UtherSRG (talk) 18:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oopsie!

Thanks for taking care of the speedies. However, there seems to have been an error: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe was deleted, which is the master subscriber list for the Signpost. It doesn't seem to be in my CSD log, so I think that something got messed up (misclick, transclusion) causing it to show a speedy template. Could you undelete it? :^) jp×g 01:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Whoops! Ok, at 5600+ edits, I'll have to do that in batches.... UtherSRG (talk) 01:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks.

Ruh-roh!!! There are a couple more of this type as well. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Index and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe/Header also have a large number of incoming links and shouldn't have been tagged. I wonder what the hell went wrong to make them show up as speedy candidates? Today has been nothing but random stuff... jp×g 01:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored those. Still working on the Subscribe.... UtherSRG (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok... All done! UtherSRG (talk) 02:10, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Sweet, everything looks poggers now; thanks for the help. jp×g 02:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Looks like "Index" and "Subscribe/Header" need some adjusting.... Or maybe there's still something more to undelete? UtherSRG (talk) 02:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

For now, I've undeleted the header template they all call out, and removed your speedy. I'm guessing what it redirs to needs to be what those pages use. UtherSRG (talk) 02:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, That's fixed it. I've modded those two pages to use the correct template, and re-deleted the old one. UtherSRG (talk) 02:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

:^) jp×g 08:08, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

John Ellerman (1909–1973)

Hi there! I was cruising through articles that are on the "maybe we should merge these" lists and bumped into this one. I'm not sure what it is, exactly. Is there a reason that it isn't simply re-directing to Sir John Ellerman, 2nd Baronet? I didn't want to jump in and redirect if there's a reason to keep it as-is. Joyous! | Talk 04:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

None at all. i've gone ahead and done that now. UtherSRG (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Tree-Kangaroo

You have just restored text that has been tagged ^{[further explanation needed]}. Is this your intention? Or are you intending to provide an explanation? The point of the edit that you undid was to remove the redunant text. IMO the text is redundant because a) it is listed as a species in the rest of the article so it would be assumed by the reader that "some recent authorities have treated it as a separate species" and b)"based on its absolute diagnostability" is a given when a species has reached general approval. This is something that would be known to the technical reader, and which would read as incomprehensible by the non-technical reader. I also changed "has" to "had previously been" to indicate that the change from sub-species to species is considered accepted and permanent. I reject the precept of your reversion namely that "There was nothing wrong with this wording". Jameel the Saluki (talk) 02:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

"has been" is correct. It "has been" described in this manner. "had previously been" infers it is no longer described as such. However, the term "described" has a very specific usage in taxonomic language and refers to the original writeup of the taxon. Your rewrite doesn't clarify, it blots out this and sweeps it under the rug. If you want to clarify, then explain or provide internal links to explain. UtherSRG (talk) 02:44, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Alternatives I'd find acceptable are on the order of "was originally described as ... is currently listed as". UtherSRG (talk) 02:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

My understanding of the word "described" relates to any taxonomic description, not just the original. In fact your alternate "originally described" infers such a meaning. The difference between "originally" and "previously" is that previously can mean any previous description, whereas "originally" refers to the only the very first. Given it was originally described as a subspecies using "originally" instead of "previously" is fine.

But the main point of the edit was the removal of the second sentence, which you then restored. Could you please address this.

It seems most of the problems you are having is with my description of my original edit as "clarification". Just ignore what I wrote there. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 03:04, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

What do you think of those?

What do you think of the two other articles in Category:Papal testaments? Veverve (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Merge/BLAR where possible. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

The Teacher (2022 Indian film)

Hey there 👋 I don't remember if I have contributed to this article substantially. If so, could you restore it? If not, all okay ;) — DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

You had moved it from draft to main article space, and did cleanup related to that. Nothing substantial. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:53, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha — DaxServer (t · m · c) 16:32, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

This was a well written article. I remember contributing to the article. Just because the article was created by a sock puppet, does the article need deletion? --Sreejith K (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems you made a substantial edit to the article, which means it shouldn't have qualified for G5. I have restored it. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Palm civet

Hi UtherSRG, I saw your message on my talk page where you reverted my edits to Civet, Palm civet, and Paradoxurus.

I was probably too brash, but I was trying to address an issue with consistency between pages, for which I don't think a new citation is necessary. Before I made those edits, Palm civet redirected to Paradoxurus, with the note For the genetically distinct genus Nandinia, see African palm civet. This does not seem completely appropriate, because there are at least 6 species of palm civet in neither

Nandinia

, including

• Owston's palm civet
• Hose's palm civet
• Banded palm civet
• Small-toothed palm civet
• Sulawesi palm civet
• Masked palm civet

which each have their own genus in Viverridae.

Would making Palm civet a disambiguation page be appropriate? I heard you like clades (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hrm. Yeah, set up

viverrid. But also, we're about to start doing an overhaul anyway to try to get more in alignment with the MDD]. Now that I've had a chance to check the MDD, I see this is the right direction to move in. For the update palm civet page, it should probably use a {{Paraphyletic group}} box, similar to the one on civet. UtherSRG (talk)

00:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Turns out

Palm-civet with a hyphen redirects to yet another page, Viverridae. I heard you like clades (talk

) 00:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Fun... :) - UtherSRG (talk) 00:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hi! I've been working on Tharun Moorthy recently and noticed yesterday about the film article deletion for Saudi Vellakka under G5. I don't know the background for the sock account involved, but were there any copyvio or other article-based issues? If not, would you be willing to undelete the article and I will take responsibility for it? Silverseren^C 00:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Undeleted. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Silverseren^C 00:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Paramount

Hi. I've reverted your undiscussed move of Paramount Global to Paramount, per reasons outlined here. Please check the talk pages of articles involved when responding to requests at RM/TR, requests that cite PRIMARYTOPIC are rarely considered "uncontroversial" or "technical". Oftentimes, they're made by inexperienced editors who are unaware of past discussions or are attempting to bypass it. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Note the dab page I moved earlier in the day. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I moved that one back as well. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Roger that. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Created again

Hello UtherSRG, I hope you're having a great day. The same new user SanoSirius who moved the rejected Draft:Annamalai Kuppusamy to an incorrect name has now created Annamalai kuppusamy with a lowercase "k", with the same content of the draft to bypass the AfC. - SUN EYE 1 14:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleted and blocked. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Dorcopsis for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dorcopsis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorcopsis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Kazamzam (talk) 21:14, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk page blanking

I understand the impulse to restore the warnings, but anyone can

blank warnings and block messages from their talk page.-- Ponyo^{bons mots}

22:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

There's an exception there about IP users... - UtherSRG (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you're seeing that, it's not in the policy I linked. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address. Do you know if an IP is shared or not? I don't. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Birthday Committee!   Chris Troutman (talk

) 16:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! :) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Vern Bennom Grimsley

Although I cannot find the message to me from 10 days ago, I would like to see the Draft: Vern Bennom Grimsley restored to my account for working on it. MaynardClark (talk) 00:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why you are asking me directly. Please make your request at

WP:RFU. - UtherSRG (talk)

00:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Move of Haunted Mansion

Hey. I saw the request at RMT and decided to do some check-up on pageview statistics but found that you had already executed the move. Before this was done, the requester changed the root redir to point to The Haunted Mansion.
Having the dab page at root name might be beneficial; for one, the film has 4 times the pageviews of the actual mansion in the past 30 days. The term can be ambiguous. What are your thoughts? Silikonz💬 19:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

The ride is "Haunted Mansion" and the 2003 film is "The Haunted Mansion"... I'd forgotten about the upcoming film this year. Might need to run a full

WP:RM. - UtherSRG (talk)

19:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I might revert for now, and recommend an RM. If the mansion is truly called Haunted Mansion without the article, one could append disambiguation to the title instead. Silikonz💬 19:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, hope you wouldn't mind - could you please do some cleanup for me, notably deleting Talk:Haunted Mansion/Archives/ 1 and Talk:Haunted Mansion/Archive 1? Might have forgotten to un-tick the redirect box. I find it a very slim channce that these redirects would be useful. Thanks. Silikonz💬 19:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Deleted. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Declined CSD nomination

There is a consensus to delete these types of user talk pages; see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Attack usernames. Partofthemachine (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok. UtherSRG (talk) 11:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Review deletion

Sir , My page was deleted in error.I Think It Should Not Have Been Deleted .Please Restore My Page And Let Me Work With This Touhid888 (talk) 06:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

No. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Anne of Brittany

This is bound to be controversial - you should have told him to do a proper

Claude, Duchess of Brittany had he even proposed a move on the talk page. Johnbod (talk

) 02:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)i

The whole point of

WP:PCM. You obviously disagree. Are you asking me to revert? - UtherSRG (talk)

11:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The whole point of

WP:RM/TR is that these are, as it says at the top of the section, uncontroversial. These very obviously weren't. I've already reverted. If he tries a proper RM, you should watch it to see how poor your judgement was. Meanwhile you should probably tread a lot more cautiously (tip: thanks to editors like him, almost nothing to do with European royalty is uncontroversial). Especially you should be careful of his move requests - there have been a lot recently. Johnbod (talk

) 16:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I will take that under advisement. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Follow up

Wow, your talk page archives quickly! Anyways, regarding your last reply here, the "For IP editors, templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address" exception is for the removal of these shared IP notices that appear at the top of some shared IP talk pages. It has nothing to do with block notices. This has come up repeatedly and there has never been consensus that editors, IP or registered, cannot remove block messages from their own talk page. Only declined appeals, while the sanctions are active, need to stay. Seems arbitrary, but that's what the consensus is. The only reason I'm bringing this up is because you misunderstand the policy and it would absolutely suck to end up blocked for edit warring to restore content that policy states can be removed. Anyways, back to all the good work you do here.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:35, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll slow down the archive a little. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I probably just need to speed up.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

LOL! :) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

New article process

Re your suggesting on submitting

Draft:MARCS Institute for Brain, Behaviour, and Development: As a long-established editor, I don't usually go through this slow process, but just create articles. This one got moved to Draft as I was in the process of adding info and sources. Does that mean I lose my usual ability to just make it an article? Dicklyon (talk

) 21:50, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

As a long-established editor, you should know better than to start an article in main article space without ensuring it has enough "goods" to not get moved to draft space. Also, upon your RM/TR request, I looked at the article and I'm not sure it would survive a AFC review. I'm still not sure it will. But no, your ability to create in main article space isn't revoked. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:01, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Still working on more refs for it. If my ability to create is not revoked, how can I use it in this case if not by RMTR? Dicklyon (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Message by Noël TCHALLAGASSOU (N D P) (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

en	This user is a native speaker of the English language.

Hello,

I can't unblock my account. In reason, I use it to do the promotion. That is my username and not my promotion account. You can see. All of modification of this is delect. I can't contribuate in en.wikipedia.org.

---Noël TCHALLAGASSOU (N D P) (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Looks like you created a new account. You do not get two accounts. Your old account will stay locked. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Norse colonization of North America

Was the talk page reviewed before this move? Moxy- 00:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Nope. Explanation on RM/TR was good enough for me. My bad. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Contribute to the move discussion moving "

Rune

"

I opened a discussion to formalize the move of "

Rune" per your request. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion! - Treetoes023 (talk

) 17:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Deleted pages

Hi. You just restored one of my pages deleted under G7. I have another 21 pages created by me and deleted under the same criteria, G7. Can you help me restore them all, please? Florin (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@

WP:RFU. See the requests by Mdaniels5757 who submits a handful of requests at a time. Just don't abuse this, and maybe next time don't G7 so many, eh? :) - UtherSRG (talk)

15:24, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Seyed Ali Mousavi Noor

Hi, I processed the request to change the lower case letters in this. And then I saw you removed the request while I was in the middle of that, so I thought it'd be good to let you know in case this needs deleting/attention/etc. Dr. Vogel (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I got interrupted. There was an existing draft. User copy/pasted into article space. No bueno. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:56, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted article

Hi @UtherSRG, It appears that the deleted article about Jayaram Kailas has been recreated with minor language changes, but without any new sources. The sources used are still the same. Additionally, he did not receive the 39th Kerala Film Critics Association Award for Director, as per the Kerala Film Critics Association Award for Best Director. Can you investigate this? I reached out to Liz But she told she is occupied at the moment. Akevsharma (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Is it eligible for or G4? Akevsharma (talk) 02:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I just G4'd it. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

So fast!! Akevsharma (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The same applies to Sunny Bhandarkar. Akevsharma (talk) 02:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The G4 criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review, or that was only deleted via proposed deletion (including deletion discussions closed as "soft delete") or speedy deletion. This article was a soft deletion and thus this can't be applied. I have recreated it with added more references that was not cited previously and more information. And G4 doesnt apply to soft delete. Please reinstate the page. Jehowahyereh (talk) 03:28, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The article includes misleading and unsupported statements, such as the claim that the subject won the Kerala Film Critics Association Award for Director. The award was actually given to the film in general as Special Jury Award, not specifically for direction. Additionally, the sources cited in the new article seem to be the same. It would be more appropriate to go through the deletion review process. Akevsharma (talk) 03:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Restored. Thanks for pointing out the soft delete clause. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

There is no misleading statement in the new article I created. I mentioned the manorama article as reference for citing the award which ssays special jury award for the director and special jury award is given to the director of the movie Akkaldamayile Pennu. Moreover he has directed 2+ movies involving substantially important actors and he is a National film jury member. He got enough featured articles Moreover the article was deleted conducting only 2 person discussion and was a soft delete. G4 can't be applied for soft delete. So please do reinstate.

It seems like the better approach would have been to request a refund rather than immediately rewriting the article. That is the proper procedure. Additionally, based on available information, it appears that the individual in question has only directed one film and has another in production which does not even have a Wikipedia article. The

WP:NFILMMAKER. Akevsharma (talk

) 04:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

G4 not applicable for soft delete. The purpose of soft delete itself is that it can be recreated. So I have made a clear wikipedia article and there are many featured news article about the 2nd movie of the director and not having a wikipedia page for that movie has nothing to do with the notability of the director. Its not the

Kerala Film Critics Association Award for directing the movie. Morevoer for being a National film jury he need to be notable and credible person in the film industry. Enough and more articles to prove his notability. Lets stick to the rules and reinstate the page and if you have any issues, go for an AFD Jehowahyereh (talk

) 04:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is no evidence found to support the claim that the person received a special jury award from the Kerala Film Critics Association Award. Additionally, the claim that the person is notable for being a National film Jury is not backed by any sources. The subject does not meet the criteria for a Wikipedia article as per the guidelines of

WP:FILMMAKER. Like you said let's stick to the rules. In this case the rule says that you have to request for undeletion. As this is not the proper venue for discussion. Let's continue the discussion on either your or my talk page. Akevsharma (talk

) 05:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I believe your next step is to start the AFD process. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Recreation

Hello UtherSRG, you recently redirected Draft:K. Annamalai to Draft:Annamalai Kuppusamy. The same user who created the draft has now created Kuppusamy Annamalai (reordered the first and last names) as a duplicate of the draft after it was declined in the AfC to bypass it. - SUN EYE 1 16:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I see that the last AFD for article was 2 years

WP:NPOL easily. He is the BJP party chief ( Current ruling party of India ) for the state of Tamil Nadu and has been covered extensively in media . Although I understand that being head of state for a party doesn't inherently make someone notable but combined with the significant media coverage and being a dominant local politician , I think we should at least let the the article pass through another AFD instead of a speedy. Razer(talk

) 17:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Just Another footnote , The person is more commonly known as - "K. Annamalai" , Google will give far more accurate results with this term instead of Annamalai Kuppusamy. Razer(talk) 17:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Regardless of viability, there should not be multiple drafts or multiple article placements. Only one draft or article should exist. Given a firm rejection of the oldest draft, there will be a high bar to accepting the draft. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore, the repeated attempts at different names for the draft/article shows a desire to circumvent the existing processes. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I understand your point of view. But still , I find it strange that the head of Tamil Nadu unit of BJP not having a Wikipedia article as BJP is the current ruling party of India and Tamil Nadu is one of the most prominent states in India. Its like the chair of GOP New York state committee not deemed fit for Wikipedia. Anyways I dont want to force the matter as I feel these issues get sorted out with time on their own. Cheers Razer(talk) 17:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Something that has so strongly been rejected can't just be simply brought back into existence without some proper process. Circumventing process is not acceptable. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, That is the reason why I am suggesting that we should let the article pass through another AFD. From what I have understood, there has been a lots of confusion here regarding this article. He was a somewhat famous police officer who joined BJP. Now when the article was listed 2 years back, this was his sole credentials and surely he would not have passed

WP:NPOL but since then he has risen to be the state chief of the party and has received significant media coverage and surely passes the Wikipedia notability criteria. Now here comes the confusing part. There is already an article by the name of - K. Annamalai

. Who is a former member of legislative of Tamil Nadu but since then has been all but retired. Now the repeated attempts to change that article to this person or to create new article for this person is not because of some nefarious purpose . It is because this person has been receiving wide media coverage since the last 2 years and it will increase with time as India is about to head for its National Polls.

Now , As i said. This situation might be alien to all those who are not familiar with India Politics. If you search K Annamalai on google, Who will find thousands and thousands of news stories. Again , its your call but my suggestion is not we should let this one pass through Another AFD. Razer(talk) 12:46, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

So do it on the oldest draft, not on attempts to circumvent the process. If needed, such as if pulling edits from the other attempts, merge the histories of those drafts and articles into the oldest draft. Summarize those pulls in the talk of the draft, so as to show good faith of addressing the concerns of those drafts' declines as well as maintaining the "who wrote what" associations. As for the other K. Annamalai, if this K. Annamalai gets approved to be an article, we will have to deal with determining which article gets what article title... but we will cross that bridge when we get to it. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:56, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Understood. I have created a request on AFC helpdesk. Lets see how it goes. Razer(talk) 13:41, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Excellent! - UtherSRG (talk) 13:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

What is the best course of action for duplicate drafts?

Hi @UtherSRG, what should we do when we have two drafts with identical content? Akevsharma (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

If it's pure copy-paste, then just redirect. If they are independently worked, then merge the histories. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Nice job on the creations of mammals pages !

Hello Uther, I just wanted to show appreciation for the large number of mammals pages you've done recently.

As you might have seen, I was working on the horrid

Indian muntjac and Talk:Southern red muntjac

Muntjac problems. I don't know if you saw that.

Thanks much for the page creations and teamwork on the missing species :)

Have a nice day ! Gimly24 (talk) 18:58, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't want to touch that with a ten-foot pole. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 20:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

Hey--you seem to be on top of that page, and I appreciate it. I was going to ask you if we can archive a bunch of it, but now I see that the oldest requests were handled only six days ago. I really didn't know we had so many of these coming in every day! Drmies (talk) 01:17, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

IKR! It's so much! I tend to Watchlist patrol and most pages I go to I just jump in, but RFU I display the list of recent edits and click on the most recent request's header so that I don't have to "jump to the bottom" after the page loads in. XD But yeah, the page gets archived regularly - I think daily - it's just a large volume that we keep processing. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Need to delete a draft for article creation from scratch

Hello UtherSRG, I noticed a draft available for biography draft:Fincy Pierre. I would like to ask you to delete the draft so that I can recreate the article from scratch. Thanks Admissible (talk) 21:01, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Why don't you work on the draft? - UtherSRG (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I think it will be a long process. And the draft has a bad history of editing conflicts. Admissible (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

So wipe away the draft and start over there. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Can I put the article live after it's finished? Admissible (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I would advise you not to. I would advise the same if I deleted the existing draft. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate. Thanks. Admissible (talk) 22:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I just submitted the draft. Admissible (talk) 23:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Good luck. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Potential Stub ?

Hello, Thanks for the quick review of the I draft I recently submitted of

Draft: David Kisiel

. I saw your comment and wanted to note and ask that at the current state of the article I honestly think it can be kept as a stub... at the least. It contains adequate sources and provides some useful information and is capable of expansion. Thanks HennSw123 (talk) 11:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The size of the article has no bearing on whether it can be moved into main article space. What matters most is that it passes the relevant

WP:NSPORT. While there isn't a specific volleyball section, you can compare the various sports sections to get an idea of what the volleyball section would look like, and then see that Kisiel's current achievements as listed in the article do not come close to what is required. - UtherSRG (talk)

11:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand. I work on a lot stubs in the volleyball community and while there isn't a section describing achievements that could be looked for, in terms of similarity and notability this article falls in line with those other stubs that I'm currently working on. I do believe the notability and numerous professional seasons thus far, which is likely to continue, is a big reason why I believe it is sufficient for stub that will expand in the future... HennSw123 (talk) 12:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

WT:NSPORT to codify volleyball notability? Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk)

12:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I can do that. I think it would be very helpful to have some sort of guideline for these volleyball articles. Because based on the articles (lots of stubs) I have worked on, Kisiel's notability and coverage is far better than what I have seen. HennSw123 (talk) 12:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm no sports expert, or I'd open the discussion myself, but I'd be glad to have a ping to keep an eye on it. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, wanted to come back to you on this. Pinged you on the

Draft: David Kisiel

, I looked more into the sources and did other research for sources and could make a strong argument that it could pass NBIO, or even GNG. There's numerous independent, reliable sources. Could you take another look at it? And with the other stubs that sometimes are questionable, how would I flag those for someone to look at?

Thanks again. HennSw123 (talk) 11:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Put it up for review again, and see if someone else wants a swing at it. For the other stubs, you can tag them with {{notability}} to alert folks they might need to be reevaluated. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I just reverted my decline, so it's at review again now. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail : Its Important

Hello, UtherSRG. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.Akevsharma (talk

) 02:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Got it. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your guidance. It appears that my presumptions were accurate. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GuildGM Akevsharma (talk) 12:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Good job. :) Once the blocks and tags are in place, let me know and I'll close the AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:07, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@UtherSRG, The sock has been blocked and is now waiting for a tag. I believe you can close the AFD now. :) Akevsharma (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Done! Oh look, they picked up a few more socks. Awesome. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Requesting undeletion of talk page post-move

Hi, UtherSRG! Hope this message finds you well. Thanks for helping carry out the move I closed at Talk:Pick a Bale of Cotton#o' vs of Requested move 2 February 2022. I noticed you G6'd the old talk page. The problem is that the RM references a merge discussion that was there. May I kindly ask you please restore that talk page? Perhaps you can undo the talk page moves and do a page swap, so the restored talk page (with that merge discussion) can reside at Talk:Pick a Bale o' Cotton? Whatever you think works best, that is. If you need more info, please feel free to ask. Thank you again for your time and assistance! Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Done! You should be able to find the relevant discussions in the talk history now. You can restore whichever discussions are relevant to the current talk page as needed. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:12, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Sol3 Mio category

Kia ora UtherSRG, would you be able to move Category:Sole Mio albums as well? --Prosperosity (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Done! - UtherSRG (talk) 12:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Quenda, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Solitary and Scrub.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, friendly little bot! - UtherSRG (talk) 12:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diwali in Muzaffarnagar

Hey! I'm not sure how you saw that as failing notability. Would you like to withdraw? I was about to speedy keep with

WP:SNOW but wondered if you'd withdraw — DaxServer (t · m · c

) 16:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I would prefer the SNOW result. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:40, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review/Request to access source code

Hi! Thanks for reviewing of the I draft I recently submitted. I see that the main concern was the references. Although I beg to differ as most of the references were from reliable third part sources and media - Techcrunch, Techround etc. Which is how most software companies on Wikipedia reference- e.g. Quickbase, Zapier, Airtable etc. Based on your comment, I wanted to ask you to review that as it's in no way an advertisement. Nothing in the submission alludes to it being 'better', 'faster', 'easier' or other form of self promotion. But simply facts about the technology company with appropriate external reference and Wiki reference. The current state of the article should at least be kept and only some sections be requested for review, not immediately deleted. It contains adequate sources and provides some useful information and is capable of expansion. Thanks

JPeem 08:38, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

What is your connection to the subject? - UtherSRG (talk) 11:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I use the product. JPeem 13:02, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Given the one-edit immediate request for article, it seems something more than just "I use the product". Re-looking, nearly everything is written in promotional language. This language doesn't need to be "this is better than that"; it simply needs to promote the product in an un-critical manner. The deletion holds. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I understand your concerns. I do use the product and enjoy using it, it was shocking that it was immediately deleted. We need more info on these No-code development platforms and Open source software.

It covered how the product works similar to those referenced earlier - product, features, funding. Appreciate the advice that 'it simply needs to promote the product in an un-critical manner'.

I've been reviewing similar wiki to scope the differences:

Stripe, WhatsApp, UiPath, Meituan, Pinduoduo, Dropbox, ByteDance, Airbnb, Palo Alto Networks, ServiceNow, Unity Technologies, YouTube, Apple, Cisco, Google, Nvidia, Webvan, Wise, N26, Revolut

So, it can be edited to sound less promotional of course. Otherwise, can I at least get the source code?

Thank you for your time and prompt responses! JPeem 13:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:CSD#G11 speedy deletion expects that the entire article would need to be re-written, and so would need to start from scratch. You created the draft all in one go from nothing. You are able to try again from nothing. Good luck. - UtherSRG (talk)

14:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Also, we need more info on these... is false. We need articles that pass

notable with respect to encyclopedia inclusion. UtherSRG (talk)

14:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Revert of your move

Not sure what to do about this move (diff), which is a revert of a move you made a couple of weeks ago. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I have no feelings either way. I made the move per a request at

WP:RM/TR, nothing more. - UtherSRG (talk)

20:06, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Blue jay

Did you mean to indefinitely extended-confirmed protect this page? It seems a bit excessive, since as far as I can tell no (auto)confirmed accounts have vandalized it recently. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:17, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah thanks. force of habit for protecting page moves is to go to extended-confirmed. I've reduced the protection now. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)